Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Industrial Emissions Noise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Beta Technologies project raises board questions about autoclave venting, tank noise and safety
Summary
Beta Technologies told the South Burlington Development Review Board its new manufacturing addition would house autoclaves and an external nitrogen tank; board members pressed the company for details on emergency venting noise and a safety plan and asked for mufflers and technical review before approval.
Beta Technologies representatives told the South Burlington Development Review Board on June 16 that the amended site plan for 530 Community Drive would add large composite autoclaves and an exterior nitrogen storage tank to support in‑house manufacturing of aircraft components. "We pressurize them with a mixture of air and nitrogen...we use that just to decrease the fire risk," Beta representative Adam Wood said, describing normal operations and the company’s safety rationale.
Board members concentrated on the acoustic and emergency scenarios. Lucy Thayer, a project manager with Bowman, said depressurization cycles last about "10 to 15 minutes" and occur roughly twice per day, and that Beta plans to install industrial mufflers on autoclave exhaust to meet property‑line noise limits. "We're going to install an industrial muffler on the exhaust...and essentially what we're trying to do is get the levels down to...within the noise limitations," Thayer said.
Members pressed the applicant on unplanned relief events from the external nitrogen tank. Engineer and board member Ted Linsky emphasized that upset venting could produce a sharp, loud sound and asked what mitigation is proposed. Beta testified that relief events are rare and that prior, similar facilities measured about 105 decibels adjacent to an unmuffled tank and may fall to the mid‑50s to low‑60s at the property line. The applicant committed to pursue muffling for the tank and to contract manufacturer or third‑party technical review for emergency venting procedures and decibel modeling.
The board did not make a final decision on this topic. Members requested additional documentation: a safety/emergency‑response plan for the storage tank, more precise decibel modeling for emergency relief events, and written commitments on muffling performance. Given documents submitted the day of the hearing and outstanding technical questions, the board continued discussion of the site‑plan amendment to its July 7 hearing to allow the applicant to supply the requested analyses and to permit staff to engage technical review where needed.
